Transgender Opposition: Thinning the difference between Christians and God-Scoffers
Jun 23, 2023 by David Fowler
King Solomon wrote, “That which has been is what will be, that which is done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.” A God-scoffer might say, “Solomon did not see educated people in positions of influence and authority (like the federal district court judge this week that held Arkansas’ ban on transgender procedures for minors unconstitutional) insisting that we treat boys as if they are girls and vice versa!” How can Solomon and the God-scoffer both be right, yet neither have an adequate “answer” to advocates of a transgender ideology? I’ll explain in less than 800 words.
The scoffer may be correct that Solomon never had to address a demand that the public accept transgenderism or its imposition by judicial decree, but confusion over and blurring the creational categories of male and female was nothing new to his world. So, I will grant that both are right.
However, Solomon’s basis for repudiating the sexual confusion expressed in transgenderism would be more limited than that which Christians could give today because the mystery of God—His triune nature—was not yet finally revealed.
Therefore, today’s scoffer and the transgender advocate might both think the reasons Solomon would give for rejecting transgenderism epistemologically lacking, i.e., his thinking would not connect the dots sufficiently for either of them.
The God-scoffing opponent of transgenderism would even say no conception of God is needed to repudiate transgenderism; it’s just common sense that boys cannot be girls and vice versa.
In my view, the “commonsense God-scoffer” is far more epistemologically lost, confused, and without an answer to transgenderism than the transgendered person is for his or her position.
The God-scoffer doesn’t understand that his common sense is shaped by the very nature of the Triune God and the reason God gives in the Bible for the way He created us. He can’t help but think in Christian categories even though he repudiates Christianity.
Unfortunately, too many Christians don’t know that the answer they should give for repudiating transgenderism is predicated on the Trinity, which is not something Solomon could have offered.
Consequently, the Christian’s answer often doesn’t look much different from the epistemologically lost, socially conservative God-scoffer who relies on common sense, which is why I think so many Christian lawyers and policy advocates quickly and without hesitation join the side of the God-scoffers in the way they argue for laws on the subject; the two “sides” should be worldviews apart but they aren’t as a practical matter.
To address what I have observed among a number of Christians, I have tried to put together an accessible yet theologically sound answer to transgender ideology in my new monograph, Transgenderism: Raising Ancient Issues Only the Ancient of Days can Answer. It is primarily directed at professing Christians who want to engage with persons beyond the level of the “I’m right and you’re wrong” kind of power-play game currently being played out in politics, but I hope others will find it thoughtful and even thought-provoking. I have also tried to explain the approach that I think needs to be taken in law if the direction of things is to change.
Of the monograph, Dr. George Grant, theologian, author, and pastor, writes the following in his foreword:
If you would like to read the first three chapters of the monograph and the conclusion to better understand the issue, send a request to info@factn.org.
The scoffer may be correct that Solomon never had to address a demand that the public accept transgenderism or its imposition by judicial decree, but confusion over and blurring the creational categories of male and female was nothing new to his world. So, I will grant that both are right.
However, Solomon’s basis for repudiating the sexual confusion expressed in transgenderism would be more limited than that which Christians could give today because the mystery of God—His triune nature—was not yet finally revealed.
Therefore, today’s scoffer and the transgender advocate might both think the reasons Solomon would give for rejecting transgenderism epistemologically lacking, i.e., his thinking would not connect the dots sufficiently for either of them.
The God-scoffing opponent of transgenderism would even say no conception of God is needed to repudiate transgenderism; it’s just common sense that boys cannot be girls and vice versa.
In my view, the “commonsense God-scoffer” is far more epistemologically lost, confused, and without an answer to transgenderism than the transgendered person is for his or her position.
The God-scoffer doesn’t understand that his common sense is shaped by the very nature of the Triune God and the reason God gives in the Bible for the way He created us. He can’t help but think in Christian categories even though he repudiates Christianity.
Unfortunately, too many Christians don’t know that the answer they should give for repudiating transgenderism is predicated on the Trinity, which is not something Solomon could have offered.
Consequently, the Christian’s answer often doesn’t look much different from the epistemologically lost, socially conservative God-scoffer who relies on common sense, which is why I think so many Christian lawyers and policy advocates quickly and without hesitation join the side of the God-scoffers in the way they argue for laws on the subject; the two “sides” should be worldviews apart but they aren’t as a practical matter.
To address what I have observed among a number of Christians, I have tried to put together an accessible yet theologically sound answer to transgender ideology in my new monograph, Transgenderism: Raising Ancient Issues Only the Ancient of Days can Answer. It is primarily directed at professing Christians who want to engage with persons beyond the level of the “I’m right and you’re wrong” kind of power-play game currently being played out in politics, but I hope others will find it thoughtful and even thought-provoking. I have also tried to explain the approach that I think needs to be taken in law if the direction of things is to change.
Of the monograph, Dr. George Grant, theologian, author, and pastor, writes the following in his foreword:
“There is nothing new under the sun,” declared the Qoheleth, King Solomon, more than three millennia ago (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Indeed, as David Fowler ably demonstrates in this compact monograph, even the most pressing hot button issues in our culture are anything but unprecedented or new. So for instance, the fractious debates over transgenderism and gender identity are merely the aberrant manifestations of a much greater and deeper issue: cosmology.
This is precisely why Biblical Theology is the starting post for us if we wish to deal substantively with a culture run amok with fantasies and phantasms. It is essential for us to begin at the beginning: with the Doctrine of the Trinity and the character and nature of God, with the Doctrine of Creation and the purposes for which God made all things, and with the Doctrine of Man both in light of the ordinances of his creaturely estate and in light of the consequences of his fallen estate.
To approach the issues of gender and sexuality from any other context reduces magisterial questions to little more than a spitting match of subjective prejudices and preferences.
Understanding this is the first step forward in repudiating the age-old heresies of salvation by legislation, salvation by medication, and salvation by education. This will enable us, as David Fowler asserts to apply the answers of the Ancient of Days to the always recurring Ancient Issues of this poor, fallen world.
This is precisely why Biblical Theology is the starting post for us if we wish to deal substantively with a culture run amok with fantasies and phantasms. It is essential for us to begin at the beginning: with the Doctrine of the Trinity and the character and nature of God, with the Doctrine of Creation and the purposes for which God made all things, and with the Doctrine of Man both in light of the ordinances of his creaturely estate and in light of the consequences of his fallen estate.
To approach the issues of gender and sexuality from any other context reduces magisterial questions to little more than a spitting match of subjective prejudices and preferences.
Understanding this is the first step forward in repudiating the age-old heresies of salvation by legislation, salvation by medication, and salvation by education. This will enable us, as David Fowler asserts to apply the answers of the Ancient of Days to the always recurring Ancient Issues of this poor, fallen world.
This monograph is vitally important at this moment of our cultural crisis because it looks beyond this moment to those enduring, eternal truths which afford us with providential perspective and prophetic perspicuity.
If you would like to read the first three chapters of the monograph and the conclusion to better understand the issue, send a request to info@factn.org.
